Help me understand!Submitted by Beetlebum on Tue, 03/26/2013 - 02:29
A conversation I had tonight blew my mind. I found myself in a political conversation with a guy I recently met, probably about my dads age, maybe a decade older. I quickly found out he was generally hard line republican spending most his news time on fox but investigating other mainstream news sources. He's the type of guy not holding anything back telling you his opinion and doing most of the talking so I found myself making my points by asking questions. I was drawn further into his monologue by comments referencing "rinos," displeasure of the country's direction, recent DHS actions, and displeasure bordering on anger with McCain and Grahm. So I dug a little deeper to see if he was borderline libertarian and could use a little push. Here's what blew my mind. In the same breath he would say how angry he was with the administration's and congress' movements against the people of the US but he advocated the use of drone strikes on Americans on American soil! (Of course this power should be checked by someone - maybe a congressional body but he didn't really know or seem to care who.) When I asked about unreasonable search and seizure and due process he essentially said f' the 4th and 5th amendments! "Of course there must be absolute proof" he says. What about a bank robber caught in video killing people? "No, don't drone strike him." Why? "He's not a terrorist committing mass murder." What??? He says we're already constantly monitored and he's not a bad guy so he wouldn't care if a drone buzzed over his house. But if he were plotting against the govt, then he would deserve to be blown up. WHAT??? He would accept any and all security measures designed to defend against terrorism - but he's mad at McCain, mad at and doesn't trust the administration/gov't leaders and would hypothetically support "Smith & Wesson" in ~40 years should the country continue it's current trend and if it were to come to that. So he believes "Smith & Wesson" could hypothetically be necessary at some point in the future but would grant the same gov't he doesn't trust the authority to constantly monitor him and kill him via drone strike should he ever plot against the government. WTF am I missing to make this make sense??? Oh he also mentioned all those sheeple out there and then bleated.